The mancityfans.net football forum

Looks bad.

http://beta.mcfc.co.uk

I really enjoyed how it was now. This new version looks very common. Saw this thematic at Arsenal at some point.

looks fine to me
when do we start using the new badge??

I am guessing we'll get used to it.

Truth be told their quality has been headed downhill for the last couple of seasons, so a change to revitalize might not be a bad thing.

Seems more mobile user friendly so that suits me.

Slim wrote:I am guessing we'll get used to it.

Truth be told their quality has been headed downhill for the last couple of seasons, so a change to revitalize might not be a bad thing.

It's been crap. Maybe it's all linked to the ticket system? Maybe we have a new head of IT and the old one's head lies in a basket somewhere in Gorton?

Does any technical bod know what a 'Beta' site is? Is it something especially technological or is it just a word for revamp?

In any case looks like I can still read 'U18s reach youth cup final' whenever I like.

john@staustell wrote:Does any technical bod know what a 'Beta' site is? Is it something especially technological or is it just a word for revamp?

In any case looks like I can still read 'U18s reach youth cup final' whenever I like.

Beta testing is usually the last stage before the public release. As a general rule it's to iron out any bugs by opening it up to a larger testing audience.

PeterParker wrote:Looks bad.

http://beta.mcfc.co.uk

I really enjoyed how it was now. This new version looks very common. Saw this thematic at Arsenal at some point.

My feelings were similar. I like our current site. I tried it and went back rather quickly. I'm trying it again, but eh, I dunno. It's quite zoomed in or something.

john@staustell wrote:Does any technical bod know what a 'Beta' site is? Is it something especially technological or is it just a word for revamp?

In any case looks like I can still read 'U18s reach youth cup final' whenever I like.

They just misspelled "better"...

It looks like a basic WordPress theme that someone took 5 minutes to install. Old site is much, much better

bigblue wrote:It looks like a basic WordPress theme that someone took 5 minutes to install. Old site is much, much better

Slap a bit of blue paint on it and it should look much more professional/less bland.

The social media nonsense on the right is far too prominent and why should I care that Dani Alves is leaving Barcelona?

It's very responsive though and should be easier to navigate on phones and tablets (haven't checked).

I Just Blue Myself wrote:

bigblue wrote:It looks like a basic WordPress theme that someone took 5 minutes to install. Old site is much, much better

Slap a bit of blue paint on it and it should look much more professional/less bland.

The social media nonsense on the right is far too prominent and why should I care that Dani Alves is leaving Barcelona?

It's very responsive though and should be easier to navigate on phones and tablets (haven't checked).

Agree about the social media stuff, not my cup of tea, but you are definitely right about the responsiveness. That's the first thing I noticed.

You can make suggestions on improvements or changes you would like to see them make. It's the reason they launch a beta for the public to test.

http://mcfcsurvey.website-beta-survey.sgizmo.com/s3/

john@staustell wrote:Does any technical bod know what a 'Beta' site is? Is it something especially technological or is it just a word for revamp?

In any case looks like I can still read 'U18s reach youth cup final' whenever I like.

It's a design stage like Slim mentions. (typically pre-alpha, alpha, beta then gold (release) - some developers have sub-stages and sub-sub-stages too)

I liked the site as it was and didn't it win a load of awards for being so good?

If it ain't broke......

ruralblue wrote:I liked the site as it was and didn't it win a load of awards for being so good?

If it ain't broke......

I guess an analogy would be like the city first team, starts off great but if you don't continually improve it it will eventually end up old and slow. Lol

london blue 2 wrote:

ruralblue wrote:I liked the site as it was and didn't it win a load of awards for being so good?

If it ain't broke......

I guess an analogy would be like the city first team, starts off great but if you don't continually improve it it will eventually end up old and slow. Lol

Ha ha very true.

Good though that they are wanting suggestions. I will feedback to then once again that the volume level of the pressers is too low.

ruralblue wrote:
Good though that they are wanting suggestions. I will feedback to then once again that the volume level of the pressers is too low.

I just thought was Pellers muttering?

It'll probably get changed properly when they launch the new badge?

london blue 2 wrote:

ruralblue wrote:I liked the site as it was and didn't it win a load of awards for being so good?

If it ain't broke......

I guess an analogy would be like the city first team, starts off great but if you don't continually improve it it will eventually end up old and slow. Lol

Websites are just like buildings. If they're designed correctly, they shouldn't need to be continually improved on the frontend, only on the backend. The most used website in the world looks practically the same as it did 10 years ago (Google).

With the City site, I feel like they started with a beautifully designed house. Then kept adding additions and rooms until it was still nice, but not as cohesive and elegant as before. And instead of tearing down all the additions, they now feel it's easier to demolish everything and start anew. The term you often hear for this is technical debt.

Shame because I really enjoy the current site.

bigblue wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:

ruralblue wrote:I liked the site as it was and didn't it win a load of awards for being so good?

If it ain't broke......

I guess an analogy would be like the city first team, starts off great but if you don't continually improve it it will eventually end up old and slow. Lol

Websites are just like buildings. If they're designed correctly, they shouldn't need to be continually improved on the frontend, only on the backend. The most used website in the world looks practically the same as it did 10 years ago (Google).

With the City site, I feel like they started with a beautifully designed house. Then kept adding additions and rooms until it was still nice, but not as cohesive and elegant as before. And instead of tearing down all the additions, they now feel it's easier to demolish everything and start anew. The term you often hear for this is technical debt.

Shame because I really enjoy the current site.

Nope, websites are like living organisms, when you fail to maintain them, they wither and die.